But 27-year-old Fort Collins resident Sarah Hardin would rather save the money and pay out of pocket for treatment than spend the roughly $800 a month she said it would cost to cover her and her husband.

As Joe Biden would say, "What a load of stuff." My wife and I are both in our mid 50s with health problems and we pay $650 a month with no subsidy.

That article by Arthur Kane is completely dishonest. What is the DP trying to prove by misinforming the public? The RMN went belly up feeding Denver right-wing propaganda. The DP needs to get a little integrity or the same thing is going to happen to them.

Is that 650 for both of you and is an employer involved as well?

And with which insurance company at what deductible?

"The only people who don't want to disclose the truth are people with something to hide." (Barack Obama August 21, 2010)

mpinco wrote:You do know that the Obamacare exchanges are on a per county basis, correct?

No, they're not. You seem to have a problem with reading comprehension.

"Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil — that takes religion."~ Steven Weinberg - Nobel laureate in Physics.

But 27-year-old Fort Collins resident Sarah Hardin would rather save the money and pay out of pocket for treatment than spend the roughly $800 a month she said it would cost to cover her and her husband.

As Joe Biden would say, "What a load of stuff." My wife and I are both in our mid 50s with health problems and we pay $650 a month with no subsidy.

That article by Arthur Kane is completely dishonest. What is the DP trying to prove by misinforming the public? The RMN went belly up feeding Denver right-wing propaganda. The DP needs to get a little integrity or the same thing is going to happen to them.

In the last few months I've checked dozens of these Obamacare "horror story" claims and found every one of them to be lies. There was a news story awhile back about an investigative reporter who checked the claims of several couples appearing on Fox News with the same result - all lies.

The truth, much to the chagrin of the the Obama-haters, is that the exchanges offer a huge variety of plans that are priced very competitively. My wife and I were offered 64 different plans to choose from ranging from zero to high deductibles. But that's not enough red meat to keep the Republican base foaming at the mouth until the November elections, hence the ongoing lies.

Obamacare isn't perfect, but the detractors would have more credibility if they stuck to the real problems instead of making stuff up. And shame on the DP for not vetting this article better.

I see NO plans for a 29yo single individual that start at $175/mo using the zip code for Littleton. Also, there are NO plans that have a deductible of $10,000 for an individual, NONE!!! This story should have been verified by the reporter writing it, just more inaccurate reporting. Also it makes me question whether the guy in this story even went to the website, you have to go through that site to actually see what kind of tax break you get and it's based on income....for a single person making less than $45,000 there would be a tax break so premium is lower.

I've heard so many stories from people who have never even been to the website, anyone can browse the site to see the accurate info, if you want to see if you qualify for a tax break then kaiser has a calculator that is pretty accurate as well.

Where does it say he's single?

"Matt Leising spends about $3,600 a year on medication to treat asthma and sinus problems, so he was supportive when Washington politicians were debating the Affordable Care Act.

After the law passed and then began rolling out last fall, Leising went to Colorado's health care exchange website to look for coverage, but the 29-year-old Littleton resident quickly realized he couldn't afford any of the plans.

The lowest monthly premium was $175, but the deductible was $10,000, meaning he would still have to pay for his medication and other expenses. He decided to just pay for his medication out of pocket and take the $95 tax penalty for a single person"

Tax penalty for a single person.....

Good work. I also found him on MySpace, says he's single.

With a $30,750 income, he gets no subsidy, and his premium for a Bronze plan is $162.33/mo. Close enough for government work. Sloppy reporting, though. That plan wouldn't have a $10,000 deductible.

Maybe there's an add on for his prescription. ObamaCare promised pre-existing condtions would be covered. Never said they'd be free.

Interesting that a single person pays almost as much as a couple. Kinda tells you what the odds are that either one of them is going to incur an expense large enough to get a benefit. This is all about paying for us old folks.

Jeff, you are correct for the most part, more people need to actually go to the health care site in Colorado and do a sample for their own situations....also remember pre existing conditions ARE covered and there is not a rate increase because of them because they do NOT asked those questions on your application at all....the price that you see on the website is what you get. I've been greeting individual health care for 10 years and can tell you from experience that the price always DID increase before from what was quoted on the websites after they checked my health care records. On this site none of those questions are even asked nor does the price change...unless of course you do qualify for a tax break. Going to another health care site may get you different results, that's why people need to go through the site set up in Colorado, in most cases it will save money. I would also question whether he didn't get a subsidy.....that's totally income related nothing to do with age.

See, the real issue is that when the rubber hits the road, all the promises of Obamacare are shown to be inaccurate or simply lies. The rubber hitting the road for the youth and middle class are out of pocket cost. As this article points out they are walking away.

But 27-year-old Fort Collins resident Sarah Hardin would rather save the money and pay out of pocket for treatment than spend the roughly $800 a month she said it would cost to cover her and her husband.

As Joe Biden would say, "What a load of stuff." My wife and I are both in our mid 50s with health problems and we pay $650 a month with no subsidy.

That article by Arthur Kane is completely dishonest. What is the DP trying to prove by misinforming the public? The RMN went belly up feeding Denver right-wing propaganda. The DP needs to get a little integrity or the same thing is going to happen to them.

In the last few months I've checked dozens of these Obamacare "horror story" claims and found every one of them to be lies. There was a news story awhile back about an investigative reporter who checked the claims of several couples appearing on Fox News with the same result - all lies.

The truth, much to the chagrin of the the Obama-haters, is that the exchanges offer a huge variety of plans that are priced very competitively. My wife and I were offered 64 different plans to choose from ranging from zero to high deductibles. But that's not enough red meat to keep the Republican base foaming at the mouth until the November elections, hence the ongoing lies.

Obamacare isn't perfect, but the detractors would have more credibility if they stuck to the real problems instead of making stuff up. And shame on the DP for not vetting this article better.

Claims like that are easy to make, and anyone can make them if they don't have to support them, so how about backing them up? Your claim would suggest you have that research data available so show it.

O'care is turning out to be a huge and problematic failure that is running costs up and reducing both doctor and treatment availabilities for many, as this article supports, maybe it's time its supporters quit defending it in spite of all evidence of its serious problems and take a look at it for what it really is.

"The only people who don't want to disclose the truth are people with something to hide." (Barack Obama August 21, 2010)

Sid wrote:O'care is turning out to be a huge and problematic failure that is running costs up and reducing both doctor and treatment availabilities for many, as this article supports, maybe it's time its supporters quit defending it in spite of all evidence of its serious problems and take a look at it for what it really is.

Got any proof of that? This article is full of misinformation, as has been pointed out by many posters.

"Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil — that takes religion."~ Steven Weinberg - Nobel laureate in Physics.

I see NO plans for a 29yo single individual that start at $175/mo using the zip code for Littleton. Also, there are NO plans that have a deductible of $10,000 for an individual, NONE!!! This story should have been verified by the reporter writing it, just more inaccurate reporting. Also it makes me question whether the guy in this story even went to the website, you have to go through that site to actually see what kind of tax break you get and it's based on income....for a single person making less than $45,000 there would be a tax break so premium is lower.

I've heard so many stories from people who have never even been to the website, anyone can browse the site to see the accurate info, if you want to see if you qualify for a tax break then kaiser has a calculator that is pretty accurate as well.

Where does it say he's single?

"Matt Leising spends about $3,600 a year on medication to treat asthma and sinus problems, so he was supportive when Washington politicians were debating the Affordable Care Act.

After the law passed and then began rolling out last fall, Leising went to Colorado's health care exchange website to look for coverage, but the 29-year-old Littleton resident quickly realized he couldn't afford any of the plans.

The lowest monthly premium was $175, but the deductible was $10,000, meaning he would still have to pay for his medication and other expenses. He decided to just pay for his medication out of pocket and take the $95 tax penalty for a single person"

Tax penalty for a single person.....

Good work. I also found him on MySpace, says he's single.

With a $30,750 income, he gets no subsidy, and his premium for a Bronze plan is $162.33/mo. Close enough for government work. Sloppy reporting, though. That plan wouldn't have a $10,000 deductible.

Maybe there's an add on for his prescription. ObamaCare promised pre-existing condtions would be covered. Never said they'd be free.

Interesting that a single person pays almost as much as a couple. Kinda tells you what the odds are that either one of them is going to incur an expense large enough to get a benefit. This is all about paying for us old folks.

Jeff, you are correct for the most part, more people need to actually go to the health care site in Colorado and do a sample for their own situations....also remember pre existing conditions ARE covered and there is not a rate increase because of them because they do NOT asked those questions on your application at all....the price that you see on the website is what you get. I've been greeting individual health care for 10 years and can tell you from experience that the price always DID increase before from what was quoted on the websites after they checked my health care records. On this site none of those questions are even asked nor does the price change...unless of course you do qualify for a tax break. Going to another health care site may get you different results, that's why people need to go through the site set up in Colorado, in most cases it will save money. I would also question whether he didn't get a subsidy.....that's totally income related nothing to do with age.

I don't suppose you would consider that when one person gets a subsidy another has to pay for it?

That means the person doing the paying is paying for both his and someone else's coverage instead of just paying for his own (which can't be done for a lower total cost).

So far, as near as I can tell and the information is either hidden or obfuscated so there is nothing definitive available, the majority of those signing up are receiving free or subsidized coverage and those who lost policies are paying more than they were (for something they liked and wanted to keep) with more people losing their policies than have replaced them through O'care.

This is not a workable program no matter how you look at it, the mathematics of it work against it succeeding.

"The only people who don't want to disclose the truth are people with something to hide." (Barack Obama August 21, 2010)

I see NO plans for a 29yo single individual that start at $175/mo using the zip code for Littleton. Also, there are NO plans that have a deductible of $10,000 for an individual, NONE!!! This story should have been verified by the reporter writing it, just more inaccurate reporting. Also it makes me question whether the guy in this story even went to the website, you have to go through that site to actually see what kind of tax break you get and it's based on income....for a single person making less than $45,000 there would be a tax break so premium is lower.

I've heard so many stories from people who have never even been to the website, anyone can browse the site to see the accurate info, if you want to see if you qualify for a tax break then kaiser has a calculator that is pretty accurate as well.

Where does it say he's single?

"Matt Leising spends about $3,600 a year on medication to treat asthma and sinus problems, so he was supportive when Washington politicians were debating the Affordable Care Act.

After the law passed and then began rolling out last fall, Leising went to Colorado's health care exchange website to look for coverage, but the 29-year-old Littleton resident quickly realized he couldn't afford any of the plans.

The lowest monthly premium was $175, but the deductible was $10,000, meaning he would still have to pay for his medication and other expenses. He decided to just pay for his medication out of pocket and take the $95 tax penalty for a single person"

Tax penalty for a single person.....

Good work. I also found him on MySpace, says he's single.

With a $30,750 income, he gets no subsidy, and his premium for a Bronze plan is $162.33/mo. Close enough for government work. Sloppy reporting, though. That plan wouldn't have a $10,000 deductible.

Maybe there's an add on for his prescription. ObamaCare promised pre-existing condtions would be covered. Never said they'd be free.

Interesting that a single person pays almost as much as a couple. Kinda tells you what the odds are that either one of them is going to incur an expense large enough to get a benefit. This is all about paying for us old folks.

Jeff, you are correct for the most part, more people need to actually go to the health care site in Colorado and do a sample for their own situations....also remember pre existing conditions ARE covered and there is not a rate increase because of them because they do NOT asked those questions on your application at all....the price that you see on the website is what you get. I've been greeting individual health care for 10 years and can tell you from experience that the price always DID increase before from what was quoted on the websites after they checked my health care records. On this site none of those questions are even asked nor does the price change...unless of course you do qualify for a tax break. Going to another health care site may get you different results, that's why people need to go through the site set up in Colorado, in most cases it will save money. I would also question whether he didn't get a subsidy.....that's totally income related nothing to do with age.

You make some great points. Before Obamacare if you purchased an individual plan you had to fill out a lengthy health history questionnaire (the last one I saw was 15 pages!), which then went to the underwriting department where they added additional premiums for illnesses you had in the past as well as sometimes excluding them from future coverage. It was a racket. And if you got REALLY sick they would compare your questionnaire in detail to your medical records and if they found any discrepancies at all - such as an unreported headache ten years ago - they would drop your coverage and refuse to pay your medical expenses, regardless of how long you had been paying premiums. People forget the real horrors of the pre-Obamacare health insurance system.

Sid wrote:O'care is turning out to be a huge and problematic failure that is running costs up and reducing both doctor and treatment availabilities for many, as this article supports, maybe it's time its supporters quit defending it in spite of all evidence of its serious problems and take a look at it for what it really is.

Got any proof of that? This article is full of misinformation, as has been pointed out by many posters.

This article, along with thousands of others from every source around.

If that isn't proof enough -and everything has been posted over and over again if you don't read anything but the DP- then nothing presented is going to make you face reality so it is an exercise in futility to try.

BTW, conveniently deleting half of my OP without indicating you have done so is deceitful at best, and an attempt to avoid the subject of it in further discussion.

"The only people who don't want to disclose the truth are people with something to hide." (Barack Obama August 21, 2010)

The real knuckleheads are the ones that voted for your husband.And for more perspective, this is the same woman who was being raved about in the media as she wore a $12,000 dress at a recent state dinner.

Last edited by MCPB14 on February 21st, 2014, 10:58 am, edited 1 time in total.

To J Locke: (thread got too long)The Conservative Heritage Foundation drew up the blueprint that led to ObamaCare with numerous tweaks and distortions. What the Republicans are capitalizing on are the lies that were told by the Democrats to sell it. It's nowhere close to free (many low income people thought it would be), it won't bring all or most of the ininsureds into the system, you won't be able to keep your doctor, you can't keep the plan you have if you like it, it doesn't reduce the cost of health care, and it won't reduce the deficit -- it's going to increase it massively.

There is no getting around the fact that the ACA attempts to cut costs by rationing benefits, especially to the elderly. Medicare already had by far the highest claim denial rate of all third party payers; the ACA will be worse. And despite the Left's lambasting of Sarah Palin's characterization as "death panels," the fact is that the age of a patient is considered when the cost of a life-saving procedure is accepted or denied. If you're over 70, you probably won't get it. It's in there if you bother to read it.

Since none of those things will happen, that's probably why the Republicans never tried to push The Heritage Foundation's plan in the first place. The math works, but the politics don't. (As the Democrats are about to find out.)

Once you outlive your immortality, you won't like it much, either.

Last edited by Ctajm on February 21st, 2014, 11:01 am, edited 1 time in total.

The essence of government is when ordinary people get themselves appointed or elected to positions of power, use that power to make rules to dictate how other people must live their lives, and enforce those rules at the point of a gun.

MCPB14 wrote:"A lot of young people think they're invincible, but the truth is young people are knuckleheads. Now young people can get insurance for as little as $50 a month, less than the cost of gym shoes."

The real knuckleheads are the ones that voted for your husband.And for more perspective, this is the same woman who was being raved about in the media as she wore a $12,000 dress at a recent state dinner.

At least they get gym shoes for their $50, not a plan that's going to bankrupt them with deductibles if they do get sick.

The essence of government is when ordinary people get themselves appointed or elected to positions of power, use that power to make rules to dictate how other people must live their lives, and enforce those rules at the point of a gun.

mpinco wrote:See, the real issue is that when the rubber hits the road, all the promises of Obamacare are shown to be inaccurate or simply lies. The rubber hitting the road for the youth and middle class are out of pocket cost. As this article points out they are walking away.

Most of the middle class hasn't been affected since they get insurance through their employers.

Most of the promises of Obamacare are true. People with pre-existing conditions can now get insurance. Your insurance can't be canceled if you get sick or injured. There is a limit to out of pocket costs for the insured, which will prevent many bankruptcies.

While some young people now pay more, high costs are due to hospitals overcharging. THAT is where the focus needs to be.

"Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil — that takes religion."~ Steven Weinberg - Nobel laureate in Physics.

Ctajm wrote:To J Locke: (thread got too long)The Conservative Heritage Foundation drew up the blueprint that led to ObamaCare with numerous tweaks and distortions. What the Republicans are capitalizing on are the lies that were told by the Democrats to sell it. It's nowhere close to free (many low income people thought it would be), it won't bring all or most of the ininsureds into the system, you won't be able to keep your doctor, you can't keep the plan you have if you like it, it doesn't reduce the cost of health care, and it won't reduce the deficit -- it's going to increase it massively.

There is no getting around the fact that the ACA attempts to cut costs by rationing benefits, especially to the elderly. Medicare already had by far the highest claim denial rate of all third party payers; the ACA will be worse. And despite the Left's lambasting of Sarah Palin's characterization as "death panels," the fact is that the age of a patient is considered when the cost of a life-saving procedure is accepted or denied. If you're over 70, you probably won't get it. It's in there if you bother to read it.

Since none of those things will happen, that's probably why the Republicans never tried to push The Heritage Foundation's plan in the first place. The math works, but the politics don't. (As the Democrats are about to find out.)

Once you outlive your immortality, you won't like it much, either.

Both Obamacare and the Heritage plan implement a private insurance mandate, subsidies for the needy and required insurers to accept everyone. The Heritage plan went further in that it completely dropped subsidies for all employer-based plans and gave everyone a 20 percent tax credit on their individual policies instead. Is that the difference you are speaking of? I don't think either party was ready to drop the employer health benefit subsidy at this point in time, and the right-wing extremists would undoubtedly be against the Heritage plan's subsidies and tax credit.

But those things could be a good enhancement to Obamacare in the future if the political winds shift a little more.

I see NO plans for a 29yo single individual that start at $175/mo using the zip code for Littleton. Also, there are NO plans that have a deductible of $10,000 for an individual, NONE!!! This story should have been verified by the reporter writing it, just more inaccurate reporting. Also it makes me question whether the guy in this story even went to the website, you have to go through that site to actually see what kind of tax break you get and it's based on income....for a single person making less than $45,000 there would be a tax break so premium is lower.

I've heard so many stories from people who have never even been to the website, anyone can browse the site to see the accurate info, if you want to see if you qualify for a tax break then kaiser has a calculator that is pretty accurate as well.

Where does it say he's single?

"Matt Leising spends about $3,600 a year on medication to treat asthma and sinus problems, so he was supportive when Washington politicians were debating the Affordable Care Act.

After the law passed and then began rolling out last fall, Leising went to Colorado's health care exchange website to look for coverage, but the 29-year-old Littleton resident quickly realized he couldn't afford any of the plans.

The lowest monthly premium was $175, but the deductible was $10,000, meaning he would still have to pay for his medication and other expenses. He decided to just pay for his medication out of pocket and take the $95 tax penalty for a single person"

Tax penalty for a single person.....

Good work. I also found him on MySpace, says he's single.

With a $30,750 income, he gets no subsidy, and his premium for a Bronze plan is $162.33/mo. Close enough for government work. Sloppy reporting, though. That plan wouldn't have a $10,000 deductible.

Maybe there's an add on for his prescription. ObamaCare promised pre-existing condtions would be covered. Never said they'd be free.

Interesting that a single person pays almost as much as a couple. Kinda tells you what the odds are that either one of them is going to incur an expense large enough to get a benefit. This is all about paying for us old folks.

Jeff, you are correct for the most part, more people need to actually go to the health care site in Colorado and do a sample for their own situations....also remember pre existing conditions ARE covered and there is not a rate increase because of them because they do NOT asked those questions on your application at all....the price that you see on the website is what you get. I've been greeting individual health care for 10 years and can tell you from experience that the price always DID increase before from what was quoted on the websites after they checked my health care records. On this site none of those questions are even asked nor does the price change...unless of course you do qualify for a tax break. Going to another health care site may get you different results, that's why people need to go through the site set up in Colorado, in most cases it will save money. I would also question whether he didn't get a subsidy.....that's totally income related nothing to do with age.

I was wrong about one thing. The prescription cost may not apply against the policy deductible, but there is a co-pay starting at about 30%, more if it's a higher tier drug. This guy's $300/mo prescription will probably cost him at least $90 with a Bronze Plan, and probably quite a bit more since it's an expensive drug that probably can't be substituted with a generic. Probably has to buy the plan to see what's in it. (I used to be on two brand name drugs that cost $200/mo; with Anthem, the cost dropped to about $100. When I got into the VA system, they substituted generics that worked just as well, and my co-pay is $10 for the two. Leising may not have the generic option.)

As for age having nothing to do with it, that's incorrect. After calculating Mr Leising's premium on the Kaiser Calculator at Age 29, I then went in and changed one variable, his age, to 23, and the premium dropped. Try comparing the premium for a 23 yr old to a 63 yr old, if you still think age doesn't matter. The people who designed this program aren't that bright, but they aren't THAT dumb.

The county variable seems to be based on the average income/poverty level for that particular county, which is a factor that determines the subsidy. I had to play around with Leising's income to determine that the least he can make to not get a subsidy is about $32,750, which gave him the max out of pocket premium. In a more affluent county, like Douglas, he might get a subsidy with that income.

Last edited by Ctajm on February 21st, 2014, 11:25 am, edited 6 times in total.

The essence of government is when ordinary people get themselves appointed or elected to positions of power, use that power to make rules to dictate how other people must live their lives, and enforce those rules at the point of a gun.

Sid wrote:Is that 650 for both of you and is an employer involved as well?

And with which insurance company at what deductible?

For both of us and no employer is involved since we're both self-employed. It does have a high deductible, but at least it's not going to bankrupt us if we need major treatment.

"Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil — that takes religion."~ Steven Weinberg - Nobel laureate in Physics.

Until....and ONLY UNTIL....True Americans remove the amerikan Parasites[Profiteering Insurance Thug$ and Corrupt Lawyer Thug$] from the Practice of Medicine; can we as a People expect to be a Healthy Humanistic Society.